VICTORIA'S MAYOR SAYS THREE THINGS WERE ON THE AGENDA AT THE STAFF UPDATE ON REPLACEMENT OF THE BLUE BRIDGE TODAY.

DEAN FORTIN SAYS BORROWING MONEY TO FINANCE THE CONSTRUCTION IS NUMBER ONE.

"AT THIS TIME WE'LL GO FORWARD ON A COUNTER PETITION TO BORROW THE FULL 60 MILLION DOLLARS, BUT OF COURSE, WE WOULD ONLY USE ABOUT 20 MILLION OF THAT BECUASE WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THE OTHER TWO-THIRDS FUNDING COMING FROM THE PROVINCE AND FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING."

THE CITY HAS ALSO RETAINED AN ORGANIZATION TO PREPARE ALL THE PERMITS NEEDED FOR THE PROJECT.

FORTIN SAYS THEY HAVE TO BE IN THE WATER BY NOVEMBER, AND THE CITY IS CURRENTLY MAKING SURE THEY ARE READY TO BEGIN WORK AS SOON AS THEY GET WORD ON FUNDING.

VICTORIA'S MAYOR SAYS THREE THINGS WERE ON THE AGENDA AT THE STAFF UPDATE ON REPLACEMENT OF THE BLUE BRIDGE TODAY.

DEAN FORTIN SAYS BORROWING MONEY TO FINANCE THE CONSTRUCTION IS NUMBER ONE.

"AT THIS TIME WE'LL GO FORWARD ON A COUNTER PETITION TO BORROW THE FULL 60 MILLION DOLLARS, BUT OF COURSE, WE WOULD ONLY USE ABOUT 20 MILLION OF THAT BECUASE WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THE OTHER TWO-THIRDS FUNDING COMING FROM THE PROVINCE AND FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING."

THE CITY HAS ALSO RETAINED AN ORGANIZATION TO PREPARE ALL THE PERMITS NEEDED FOR THE PROJECT.

FORTIN SAYS THEY HAVE TO BE IN THE WATER BY NOVEMBER, AND THE CITY IS CURRENTLY MAKING SURE THEY ARE READY TO BEGIN WORK AS SOON AS THEY GET WORD ON FUNDING.

I'm confused...doesn't it only go to referendum with enough petition signatures?Or is this simply going to referendum to save everyone grief?I'm a little slow getting out of the gate today.

The confusion was caused by the headline writer, who prematurely called it a "referendum". Fortin theoretically could call a referendum, but he says he wants to proceed by counter-petition. If the counter-petition succeeds in getting 10% of voters to sign, then that forces a referendum. If the counter-petition doesn't get 10%, the city borrows the money and the bridge comes down.

The rules for this "alternative approval process" are in s. 84 and 86 of the Community Charter, posted here.

Look, we only need to sign up 10% of the voters. I know we can pull this off, if we have enough time before he calls/enacts the 30-day window.

I pledge that I can sign up 1000.

My question is, who gets to phrase the referendum question?

If it is "Given that the current bridge will be more expensive to repair, than to replace, do you support..." then it is doomed, but if it is "Given that we refurbished the bridge just 10 years ago, and were assured it would then serve us for another 30 years..." then that's a new ballgame.

The confusion was caused by the headline writer, who prematurely called it a "referendum". Fortin theoretically could call a referendum, but he says he wants to proceed by counter-petition. If the counter-petition succeeds in getting 10% of voters to sign, then that forces a referendum. If the counter-petition doesn't get 10%, the city borrows the money and the bridge comes down.

The rules for this "alternative approval process" are in s. 84 and 86 of the Community Charter, posted here.

Look, we only need to sign up 10% of the voters. I know we can pull this off, if we have enough time before he calls/enacts the 30-day window.

I pledge that I can sign up 1000.

My question is, who gets to phrase the referendum question?

If it is "Given that the current bridge will be more expensive to repair, than to replace, do you support..." then it is doomed, but if it is "Given that we refurbished the bridge just 10 years ago, and were assured it would then serve us for another 30 years..." then that's a new ballgame.

I like this kind of gumption. My memory is foggy how short we were for Ellice St. Park.With your pledge, and people getting organized...it can be done.

I noticed that the Community Charter says a counter-petition needs 10% of the "electors" to succeed. I assume that means eligible voters. The turnout in the last municipal election was 17,080 voters, or 27% of the electorate, which means there are about 64,000 eligible voters and a counter-petition would need 6400 signatures to succeed.

In a nutshell, it says the City of Victoria is looking to borrow $63 million to replace the bridge. This would trigger a counter-petition process, giving opponents 30 days to gather signatures of 10 percent of all Victoria residents (that's 7,806 signatures) to force a referendum on the issue in the 2012 municipal election.

I just spoke with Mike McCliggot, the assistant city manager, and he said a formal report and draft of the request for the funding will be presented to city council in August. Once they adopt it, that will start the 30-day countdown.

I noticed that the Community Charter says a counter-petition needs 10% of the "electors" to succeed. I assume that means eligible voters. The turnout in the last municipal election was 17,080 voters, or 27% of the electorate, which means there are about 64,000 eligible voters and a counter-petition would need 6400 signatures to succeed.

Since there is no enumeration for local elections, it is hard to know how many electors there are. Keep in mind that all property owners would also be considered electors for the petition process so the actual number may be higher.

That said, in a counter petition process, I would aim for 10 000 signatures to ensure the total needed is achieved. You do not know what the final goal post is and you will get people signing that are not supposed or they sign it in such a way as to be unclear who they are.

I believe that Victoria council knows or at least strongly suspects that there will be no infrastructure money to replace the bridge. My concern is that the idea of replacing the bridge with some spectacular piece of workmanship is being viewed as some sort of personal legacy. The plan seems to be to spend enough money getting us to a point of no return where we will be out of pocket big time unless the bridge proceeds.

Just heard it--good interview. And Lennam did take the Devil's Advocate position like he did with Fortin earlier, this time asking if infrastructure funds were in fact a good thing. The highlight for me was how the City bundled the maintenance AND seismic upgrading into the cost of refurbishment versus replacement.

I thought Harper was here to announce education-related funding, not general infrastructure stuff.

"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009